On Saturday 14 March 2009 5:34 PM Platt responds to Joe; > Hi Joe, > > Thanks for responding, but I don't grasp your point. Do you think > moral choices are relative to individuals and/are cultures or > not? It would seem from Pirsig's SODV quote that it is. But, that > would put a kibosh on his idea of a universal morality would it > not? To put it another way, what moral standards does the MOQ > propose, if any? If there are standards, by what authority would > they be enforced if each individual is allowed to make > moral choices based on his life history? > > Thanks, > Platt
Hi Platt, IMO Pirsig posits a moral order of evolution: Inorganic etc.. Is this hierarchical order in existence, the metaphysical basis for a moral judgment? What is being judged? Is it a manifestation of an individual person within an event or the hierarchical order? IMO According to Pirsig there are four orders in existence inorganic, organic, social, intellectual, a moral order. I prefer an analogy to the musical scale for order, seven levels in DQ existence. What is the measure for a manifestation within a particular order? Does MOQ the statement of the order, DQ/SQ the experience within the order qualify? IMO these three things are present in an individual manifestation. What it is, what it is not, what is the neutral support level (+,-,0). Can I observe a law of 4 or 7 in determining the level for order? A law of three to determine the manifestation? IMO Both are involved in a moral judgment. Enforcement is good or bad. I don¹t know if my thoughts are any clearer? The metaphysics of morality (experience) is difficult without commandments or particular decisions to judge. I would guess the standard of authority to be what is metaphysically described. And here I thought we were just having fun! Joe On 3/14/09 5:34 PM, "Platt Holden" <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Saturday 14 March 2009 8:27 AM Platt asks all: >> >> <snip> >> >> "The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of >> quality >> is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns >> are >> different for everyone because each person has a different static pattern >> of >> life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns influence >> his >> final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among individual >> value >> judgments but not complete uniformity." (Pirsig--SODV) >> >> With one stroke Pirsig overthrows his premise of universal morality by >> admitting to moral relativity. Further, he implies that to overcome >> moral >> relativity is impossible because "each person has a different static >> pattern >> of life history." >> <snip> >> >> "Where have I go wrong in this post?" >> >> Hi Platt and all, >> >> If principles for a manifestation are established, are they the same as >> the >> principles for an order? DQ is an undefined principle in order expressed >> by >> evolution MOQ. I prefer 7 levels of evolution. DQ is also coupled with >> SQ >> in a manifestation within a particular order of evolution, MOQ DQ/SQ. >> IMO >> The relationships of DQ between a manifestation and order are different. >> DQ >> as the order of evolution stands alone since it is describing existence. >> For a manifestation, MOQ, the DQ stands with SQ as evolution as Pirsig >> says. >> >> Joe > > Hi Joe, > > Thanks for responding, but I don't grasp your point. Do you think moral > choices are relative to individuals and/are cultures or not? It would seem > from Pirsig's SODV quote that it is. But, that would put a kibosh on his > idea of a universal morality would it not? To put it another way, what > moral standards does the MOQ propose, if any? If there are standards, by > what authority would they be enforced if each individual is allowed to make > moral choices based on his life history? > > Thanks, > Platt > > > > > > >> >> On 3/14/09 8:27 AM, "Platt Holden" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> All: >>> >>> A major premise of the MOQ is the existence of a universal moral order, >> of >>> good and evil, right and wrong. Understanding this moral order depends >> on >>> understanding the constant conflicts between the evolutionary moral >> levels. >>> What is right at the biological level (the law of the jungle) is wrong >> at >>> the social level (laws of society), etc. Also required is the assumption >> of >>> an indefinable moral force called Dynamic Quality. >>> >>> But when it comes to individuals, universal morality appears to revert >> to >>> individual idiosyncrasies. In a word, morality becomes subjective -- a >>> concept the MOQ otherwise attempts to deny. >>> >>> "The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of >> quality >>> is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns >> are >>> different for everyone because each person has a different static >> pattern >>> of life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns >> influence >>> his final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among >> individual >>> value judgments but not complete uniformity." (Pirsig--SODV) >>> >>> With one stroke Pirsig overthrows his premise of universal morality by >>> admitting to moral relativity. Further, he implies that to overcome >> moral >>> relativity is impossible because "each person has a different static >>> pattern of life history." >>> >>> I think moral relativists (the multiculturist, political correctness, >>> tolerance-above-all crowd) that infest academia would eagerly seize on >>> Pirsig's acknowledgment of subjective nature of moral judgments to toss >> the >>> MOQ out of serious philosophical consideration if indeed they haven't >>> already done so. >>> >>> Perhaps this is what our friend Ham has been banging about all along. So >> to >>> all true blue MOQites I ask, "Where have I go wrong in this post?" >>> >>> Regards, >>> Platt >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >> >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
